April 30

I'd wait till the report of the Winograd Commission is officially released and see what impacts it has on the Olmert government, e.g. some high profile politician losing his job, etc. --PFHLai 23:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

How is this news? Every head of state/government gets criticized, anyway. --HowardtheDuck 03:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

This was a government-appointed commission of inquiry, not just another individual on the street. AecisBrievenbus 10:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The Blue Ribbon Committee does this all of the time, isn't it? Is this an equivalent? --HowardtheDuck 11:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

However government appointed commission of inquiries criticisng a government isn't that uncommon. Perhaps the key thing here is that this criticism is particular strong and what the criticism is about is more serious then your ordinary 'run of the mill' thing but I'm still not convinced it's enough to merit ITN in the absense of further events (ministers resigning, government collapsing etc) Nil Einne 11:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

What is remarkable/striking/notable is that the Winograd Commission was called into being to review/analyse this particular war. This particular report was/is its raison d'être. AecisBrievenbus 10:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

That preliminary report was indeed official. Right. I missed that final sentence. The Winograd Commission article currently has more on the leaked versions reported on TV than the official one. Olmert's response and Eitan Cabel quitting are also missing from the article. --PFHLai 17:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

This is more than just routine criticism. Both Olmert and Peretz may be forced to resign in the coming hours (see [www.haaretz.com]). Yes the article needs a fair bit of work. Several thousand Students are blocking Tel Aviv streets right now. Much larger demonstrations calling for Olmerts resignation are sceduled for tomorrow evening. Yes the article needs a fair bit of work. ابو علي (Abu Ali) 12:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Posted. I think a mention of the protest is needed. IMO, the involvement of the public in the protest makes this a remarkable, significant event. If it's just politicians yapping at each other, it's boring and not ITN-worthy. Yes, the line is somewhat long, but not as long as the line about the UK elections at the top of ITN right now. --PFHLai 06:03, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't see referenced info on the 5 convicts being al-qaeda members or about the trial being "the longest trial in British legal history." Please add them to the article. Please also cleanup the article so that it doesn't read like a timeline. Thanks. --PFHLai 23:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

It is referenced that they got there instructions from al qaeda leaders in pakistan, and the trial section reads like a timeline because it was an On-going trial until this morning.Hypnosadist 00:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

There's a difference between getting instructions from Al Qaeda leaders (i.e. being an Al Qaeda operative) and being an actual member of the Al Qaeda organisation. AecisBrievenbus 00:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

No there isn't, but an argument about if they had al qaeda decoder rings can and should be had on the talk page of the article, not here. This is about if the news story leading across britain and europe linked to a pre-existing article should go into ITN. Hypnosadist 01:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The discussion about their relation to Al Qaeda should be held here as well, because it would affect the wording of the blurb, if this is put up. AecisBrievenbus 10:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

This one took me a while to decide. Račan was the immediate past PM, and practically the leader of the opposition until his sudden resignation. With an election coming up in a few months, he might become PM again. This is an "almost pass" for criterion 5-1. He only resigned recently and died soon afterwards, this counts as "unexpected" to me, even though the death took weeks. (Sigh... poor guy...) That's a "pass" for criterion 5-2. When it comes to major international impact or interest for criteria 3 & 5-3, well, I'm still waiting for this to appear on BBC online news, etc. If the world eulogizes Račan as one of the leaders who led Croatia out of Yugoslavia (he was the guy who told Milošević off in 1990???), like Franjo Tuđman, then we may have a stronger candidate. I have to decline for now. Maybe someone else more familiar with Croatian history and politics can look into this.

BTW, the suggested headline is longer (and more informative!) than the current lead paragraph in Račan wikibio. A more concise headline would be preferable. Thanks. --PFHLai 06:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Rostropovich's biography in wikipedia now has a new section on his illness and death. There should be adequate updating. --74.13.125.30 15:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the updating. Please also address criterion 5. An old person dying of old age shouldn't be considered as unexpected. If Rostropovich was still active last year, jetting around to perform (or to drum up funding for his charity to buy vaccines for Azerbaijani kids), but suddenly fell ill a few weeks ago, then the death last week might be counted as unexpected. Is this what happened ? The article doesn't have much on Rostropovich's latest activities prior to his hospitalization, suggesting that he had been inactive. --PFHLai 23:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Could you please elaborate why you think this qualifies or doesn't qualify? CFIF here and PaxEquilibrium above have made an effort to assert the notability and newsworthiness of the deaths of Josh Hancock and Ivica Račan. I think they deserve a more elaborate reply than "see...", without telling them what they should find over there. If you think these deaths are not notable/newsworthy enough, please say so. Don't make us have to guess what you probably think of the nomination. AecisBrievenbus 00:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Aecis, I thought Criteria 5 would be very obvious once one read it. In these cases, Ivica Račan was not in high ranking office at the time of his death and Josh Hancock died unexpectedly, but was not a key figure in his field; and neither death has had a major international impact that affects current events. --Monotonehell 05:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think simply referring to criterion 5 is very obvious. First of all, it doesn't become clear where you stand, whether you think it passes or not. It's likely you think it's doesn't pass, but likely still means a guess. But most importantly, it's not clear which part of the criterion doesn't apply to this death. Was the deceased not "in a high ranking office of power at the time of death"? Was the deceased not "a key figure in their field of expertise"? Was the death not "unexpected or tragic"? Did the death not have "a major international impact that affects current events"? AecisBrievenbus 13:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The league is followed worldwide, but not the deceased. This death is probably not notable enough for ITN. --PFHLai 00:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Most definitely not. From a quick scan of his article he doesn't even seem to be particularly famous even as a baseball player. Badgerpatrol 01:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant to mention this 2 days ago and I forgot. I'm skeptical of the licence used at Flickr. The Flickr-user (caribbeancricket) has a few other pics in his (her?) album that appear to be copyvio's to me (screenshots, logo, and some pics labelled as "Official Photo"), so I decided to avoid using any pics from this user on MainPage. --PFHLai 16:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Earthquakes of this magnitude are extremely rare in the United Kingdom. --Philip Stevens 09:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Keep an eye on this one, not sure if it's of International importance as yet. Also it needs much work to bring it up to standard. --Monotonehell 10:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay we've worked it up to an acceptable standard. However the event doesn't appear to meet the International importance criteria. Any opinion on whether it is at least of International interest? Some structural damage and one bumped head, from an earthquake not in a normally recognised earthquake zone? Enough to peak interest? I'm unsure. --Monotonehell 14:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Even if it's making the news throughout the world, that does not mean it's of international importance. It's barely even of British importance- just because something is rare doesn't make it ITN-worthy, and one injured woman plus minor damage does not equal Front Page consideration. -- Kicking222 16:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't have much impact on the everyday lives of the people in Kent, besides a blackout for a few hours for some. And it's not that rare, as Dudley had a similar quake in 2002. If the cliffs at Barton-on-Sea collapse, altering the coastline of Britain, then maybe we have something interesting. --PFHLai 16:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with PFHLai, even despite my desire to see real British news on the Main Page. J Milburn 19:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Seems a bit like pro-British systematic bias by everyone suggesting this. A minor earthquake, even if its rare, is of no real importance unless there are a number of casualities. Computerjoe's talk 21:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

April 27

This was already removed from MainPage by two different admins [3][4] for not meeting ITN criteria. If we are making an exception and allow this on ITN, we should at least remove the POV and write in present tense. --PFHLai 15:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

In addition to this not meeting any of the ITN death criteria, the article contains the barest possible mentions of Rostropovich's death. This item was added by a well-meaning sysop who obviously lacks familiarity with ITN. —David Levy 15:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I can't see any reason to make an exception here. His death was from age related issues, he was a leader in his field but his death was not unexpected. Great man no doubt, but ITN is not an obituary column. Also the article isn't our best work. (tagged with ref issues) --Monotonehell 15:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Surely the most blatant possible evidence that the ITN death criteria are completely risible. Rostropovich's death not noteworthy? Do try and get a grip. Vilĉjo 23:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Please note that noteworthiness is not the issue here. --PFHLai 03:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

As a musician, I have to go with WP:IAR here. Please don't be mistaken, this man was a GIANT in the field. This is akin to Bobby McFerrin or Maxim Vengerov passing. This must be mentioned. Kntrabssi 06:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

He was indeed a giant, but the article doesn't meet the current ITN criterias. --Camptown 08:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Which, as I said, demonstrates that the criteria are laughable, and an extremely poor reflection on Wikipedia. The credibility of WP receives a further downward shove. Vilĉjo 09:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome to try to get it changed, but empty complaining accomplishes nothing. --Golbez 09:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

We don't report breaking news and we don't post obituaries on ITN. To get a recent death onto ITN, the death itself must be notable, not just the person who died. Besides one or two lines on the cause of death and the date and place (which is what we currently have in the Mstislav Rostropovich article), the article must contain some recently added news-related materials, updates on how the death affects current events, such as international reactions to the death, state funeral, memorials to be erected, end of a high-profile war crime trial, ending of a ruling dynasty, beginning of a succession crisis, power vacuum and political crisis, large-scale manhunt chasing the killer(s), adding fuel to an already volatile diplomatic situation,... or something like that. For an unexpected death of a notable person active in his/her field, the article needs information on the circumstances of the death. Have you read the ITN criteria yet ? Please feel free to propose changes to the criteria at Template talk:In the news instead of being unconstructive and annoying people when you are better off trying to be persuasive. (However, if all you want is to mention a death on a MainPage, you may want to try n:Main Page. That's where breaking news goes.) --PFHLai 16:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

There is now a new "Illness & Death" section in Rostropovich's bio. Please re-consider.--74.13.125.30 15:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I was thinking of suggesting this too. My only concern would be the POV tag that's currently on there.--Pharos 07:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

This is important news. It should be added, despite POV concerns which automatically come with politically controvercial topics like this. I would suggest a slightly different hook: "despite violent protests" doesn't seem very neutral (according to the article some protestors support the remove of the monument). Maybe something like "causing high level political controversy" would be more relevant?--Camptown 07:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Support. And the Russian reaction seems balanced as usual... According to Reuters: "Russia's upper house of parliament voted today on a resolution calling on President Vladimir Putin to break off relations with Estonia after the statue's removal". Bondkaka 08:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Posted. Mentioned the protests, as most of the updates is about the protests, but did not use the word 'despite'. Mentioned the political controversy but did not use the words 'high level' -- my and Camptown's POV? I can try to get a better pic, but it's not that easy due to the 100px size limit on MainPage. Suggestions are welcome. Pls post them here. Thanks. --PFHLai 13:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I've switched to a pic of yours, Petri Krohn. I gotta feature the work of a fellow Wikipedian instead of using something taken from Flickr. --PFHLai 14:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I think you've done a great job with the hook. --Camptown 14:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

April 25

This was added on the 24th below. Has the article become stable as yet or are there still disagreements over the claim? --Monotonehell 01:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I suggest that we hold off on this one until the Toyota and GM fanbois stop the edit war on both articles. Also possibly hold off until an entire financial year's worth of data is available. It sounds like they are neck and neck but too early to call. --Monotonehell 07:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Is there anything particularly notable about this? Delaying an election that he himself called by less than a month sounds more operational than political. (I think we had a an item when he called it in the first place?) --Monotonehell 07:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I guess not. I decided to post this and let somebody else be the judge. — Alex(T|C|E) 08:00, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

This doesn't seem important enough (yet). Let's wait till Ukraine's Constitutional Court determines the legality of the President's decree to dismiss the Parliament and call the election. The verdict comes tomorrow, right ? That's more important. (However, I am not saying tomorrow's announcement is ITN worthy. It depends on what happens then.) --PFHLai 02:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

There isn't enough clarity about when the verdict will be, since a second decree was issued. But the court ruling should be significant enough for ITN no matter what it is. — Alex(T|C|E) 06:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

The bolded article in question only contains a single sentence on the topic at hand. I think it will have to be expanded before it will get featured. The great kawa 03:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The Nigerian general election, 2007 article has more new and relevant materials, so maybe this link can be bolded instead. However, it doesn't mention EU observers saying "cannot be considered to have been credible", etc. Please update further. Thanks. --PFHLai 05:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Neither article say any more than "he won and some people are disputing it" not exactly substantial encyclopedic background material as yet. --Monotonehell 12:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Posted. More can be added, but I'm somewhat content with the updating the past two days. Please add more. --PFHLai 14:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

It's amazing what a few hours can do, much better now. --Monotonehell 15:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Toyota surpasses General Motors in first quarter sales for 2007, becoming the world's largest automaker. (C'mon, how long has it been since we had a financial item?) - BanyanTree 07:26, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I've added a full paragraph on the subject, but do not believe that the news items deserves more than that in the Toyota article. Have I mentioned that the new "significant update" requirement seems to propel the creation of articles on micro-topics? - BanyanTree 09:19, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The "significant update" criteria isn't new (Criteria 2), but we might have to soon examine the criteria in general again. There's been a lot of pressure from some kinds of topics to get in and a great lacking in nominations for others. I'd say there's been just enough of an update and in general the article is in good condition. Although it could do with a bit of a tidy format wise. I support its inclusion. --Monotonehell 09:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Just to be clear, the criteria say nothing about the size of the required update. The change to the discussion page in December about a "reasonable amount of information" was a result of discussion on that page, not a guideline proposal. The shift in opinion that "update" means "significant update creating a full-bodied introduction to the subject for readers" rather than "any level of update, including cursory, to encourage building of the article by editors" is quite recent. Though it might be better stated as "the number of admins who revert ITN items that don't fit their definition of 'update' has reached a critical mass only recently." I'll stop now. - BanyanTree 13:35, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

There's a certain amount of reading between the lines here, but I see it from the aspects that this is an encyclopedia, not a news service; and what a typical reader would expect from an encyclopedia as opposed to a news service. Therefore when I look at a candidate, the article in question should either have a substantial amount of background to the topic or have an in depth discussion of the news item. If there's little more information than the headline itself, then that's not appropriate. If there's an existing article providing background plus a paragraph or more of new info, then that's appropriate. --Monotonehell 14:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The Automaker article needs to be updated. It is still showing 2005 data with GM as the largest. (Do I have a cache problem ?) Not a good idea to post links on MainPage to conflicting information. --PFHLai 15:12, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed and now there's some conflict over the claim. The ext link to BBC claims Toyota is, so where does that leave things? (Noted that the editor who made this edit has only edited GMC articles in the past lol) --Monotonehell 17:34, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

(as above) I suggest that we hold off on this one until the Toyota and GM fanbois stop the edit war on both articles. Also possibly hold off until an entire financial year's worth of data is available. It sounds like they are neck and neck but too early to call. --Monotonehell 07:21, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

That's too long for a headline. Can you reduce this to the salient points? Secondly and more importantly, there's not been enough updated information in the article and what has been added says "Mr.Gül will most probably be the 11th president of Turkish Republic..." That's speculation, not verified past events. --Monotonehell 09:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

About shortening it, you are right. I just don't know what to odd out. And you are also right about the article not being updated, since it's so fresh news, it was just announced as I entered the info here. But his presidency is not a speculation anymore. This party has the majority in the parliment and their official candidate (whose announcement was expected since couple of weeks) is surely going to be the president of Turkey. Of course technically there's still an election, but now everybody knows who the winner is. I don't know maybe you'd like to have it in the news section after the election, but than it's not going to be fresh news. So I don't know, if somebody is willing to summerize it (As I said, I don't knpw what to odd out) and put it into the main page it will probably be updated faster. Regards, Kerem Özcan 13:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Having "fresh news" isn't such a concern as this is an encyclopedia not a news service. The important part is that anything we present is verified. As PFHLai says, we must wait for either the official results or for something unusual to happen (protests etc) --Monotonehell 17:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

A second march was indeed held on April 29. Please update the article and suggest a new headline. Thanks. --PFHLai 13:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Gliese_581_c - an earth-like exoplanet. In the middle of habitable zone, 5xM(E), 1.5x R(E). This is just BIG news 70.49.159.145 02:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I understand that the picture of Boris Yelsin is free to use. --Camptown 14:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. Feel free to edit/tweek language as needed. I have saved the addition of the image for a more ITN-experienced admin. youngamerican(ahoy hoy) 14:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

It's almost laughable that Traian Băsescu's picture has not yet been exchanged with that of Boris Yeltsin. Bondkaka 15:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Bondkaka, instead of laughing, you can help out by confirming the copyright status of the two suggested images. Please note that not everything from the website of NARA or NASA is in the public domain. --PFHLai 19:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

You can also try looking for a different image. I did but didn't have much luck. Came across this [5] (clearly not in public domain) & these [6], [7], [8] (all three uncertain but face can't be seen well so it's irrelevant Nil Einne 19:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I uploaded two pictures of Yelsin available at the official website of the President of Russia. These photos may be reproduced in any media outlets. No prior approval from the Presidential Press and Information Office is required to publish the photos. Should be OK to post on the main page. --Camptown 20:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for trying, Nil Einne & Camptown. I like Image:Boris-Yeltsin2.jpg. I've even prepared and uploaded an M-cropped version for ITN. However, there is an ongoing debate in WCommons regarding the use of images from Kremlin.ru. I think it's better to avoid using them on MainPage until the issue is resolved. The image currently on ITN is probably okay. Pharos has swapped out the NARA tag there with a PD tag. --PFHLai 06:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Official results are preferred. Maybe we can have a line about Ségolène Royal(pictured left) and Nicolas Sarkozy(right) going to the second round runoff when the outcome is more certain and updated into the French presidential election, 2007 article. Are the pollstations in France closed yet ? I'd would wait a bit and suppress the urge to report breaking news on the front page of an encyclopedia. --PFHLai 18:53, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with PFHLai, attribution/verification is one of the pillars of an encyclopedia, exit polls may be a good indication of a result but they are hardly a verified and official source of a vote. When the official word comes down then absolutely the item should be looked at. --Monotonehell 19:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Official results won't be available till the 25th. I hope people can wait that long. --PFHLai 20:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

This really needs to be removed. It's premature, "...will advance to the run-off." not only are we citing exit polls - those polls aren't even announcing the final result. The standard practice is to only place final official announcements in ITN. --Monotonehell 08:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

The BBC are reporting it as fact, as are several other news sources. While they may only be exit polls, when there are margins as large as this one, nothing will change and the result can be reported. 138.38.250.200 10:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

You've missed my point, ITN only includes the results of the final vote for any head of state or similar of any nation. This is the final round (2 candidates remain), not the final result. The final vote is on the 6th of May. --Monotonehell 12:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I think we should have at least waited till the official first-round results are released on Wednesday. This first round vote is a critical and high-profile juncture in this long election process, and might be important enough for ITN. I can remove this item from ITN and hold it off ITN for two days if I see more support (here) for the temporary removal. --PFHLai 13:45, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Keep it as is. While Monotonehell's point is a good one, I'm sure wikipedia will mention the parties nominations for the US after the primaries in November. The French version is similar, just without such a long gap! And there really is no point waiting till Wednesday. The result is out there, and even the candidates accept it. ImmunolPhD 14:04, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

The problem with that is we've had discussions recently where we kept other countries' nominations and candidates out, on the promise that we would treat the US presidential elections in the same manner. The consensus was to only list the final results of any nation's elections and only the top level results (head of state/president/prime minister) of any nation (ie not states or SARs). So the upcoming US presidential candidates would only be mentioned for other unusual reasons. Perhaps if Hillary Clinton was directly in line for the presidency she'd get a line in ITN as the first female candidate. So perhaps the item in question should be changed to reflect Ségolène Royal's similar first potential female French President? --Monotonehell 14:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Still not the point. No one's the next President of France yet. ;) --Monotonehell 19:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Chirac is still the President of France until May 17 ;) --HowardtheDuck 15:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC) -- *slap!*--Monotonehell 09:01, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

We already had Royal once as the first female candidate. I guess we could have her as the first female to get through the first round? Nil Einne 19:28, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

-sets up sandbags for future flood of accusations of inconsistency and bias- ;) Yeah I forgot we had her mentioned previously. I just think we should stick to our guideline of only mentioning the final official result of any election / sporting event. Otherwise we will get complaints in the future of "why did Royal get in but not xyz..." But now I'm just repeating myself. --Monotonehell 19:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

April 21

The conclusion of Expedition 14 may be a worthy ITN topic but the article need updating. I'll keep an eye on it. --PFHLai 13:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Still not updated. Some parts on past events still in future tense. --PFHLai 13:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately two lines does not an interesting ITN candidate make. There's not been a substantial enough event to make for a substantial update to the article. The information in the article is little more than the headline. --Monotonehell 09:21, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Of course. Lara will be retiring later today. Please check back later. --74.14.22.105 13:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I understand that Lara is a highly notable cricketer. But how is his retirement notable enough for the ITN section of an encyclopedia? AecisBrievenbus 14:25, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

The end of an era should qualify. However, don't put this on ITN when there's so little new materials. I expected more information on his last match and some quotes for the special occasion. Not in there yet. --74.13.127.204 07:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind seeing this on ITN, but parts of the Brian Lara article read like it was written by a fan and needs a bit of clean-up. --PFHLai 19:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Lara is indeed up there in the Maradona/Jordan/Woods bracket. He is looked upon as one of the greatest cricketers of all time, certainly up there with Warne (perhaps slightly ahead of him) and way ahead of Glenn McGrath (I assume it's one of these two you're referring to above, both retired recently but neither is or was captain of Australia). This one should probably have gone up, I think, but if the article isn't updated, so be it. Badgerpatrol 16:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Lets just add this after the CWC final, like <Team A> wins over <Team B> by <insert how the team won>, with Brian Lara of host nation West Indies retiring in international cricket. --HowardtheDuck 07:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think it's correct. The reason is that they alleged he did some things which the constitution does not allow and I guess that "abuse of power" is the right thing to say.

In 30 days, there should be a referendum for impeachment, but Băsescu says he wants to resign instead and have that would trigger new presidential elections in max. 90 days. bogdan 13:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

BTW, there is one public domain photo in the article as well as several more available (do a search for his name at .gov, he visited the US twice in the past 2 years and Rice visited him once) so we might be able to use a photo of him for ITN, if suitably cropped Nil Einne 17:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

How about updating ITN with the National Coat of arms of Romania? --Camptown 22:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

April 18

The uncanonical Montenegrin Orthodox Church that has no control over most religious institutions in Montenegro (most belong to the Serbian Orthodox Church) has tried to seize the center of the Metropolinate of Montenegro and the Littoral, the Cetinje monastery, by force; after police fought off several attempts to break through the militia wall, the mob tried to take over a smaller Church not far away but managed only to secure its grounds due to security forces' quick action and announced that this is just the beginning; the incident brought a great political division to Montenegro that might lead to future crisis; no major injuries. --PaxEquilibrium 23:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Reference(the only article about it in English so far): [10]Sideshow Bob 23:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I understand this may be significant for Montenegro (although I do detect some soapboxing in your nom), but I don't see how this is notable enough for ITN. Furthermore, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and ITN is not Wikinews. AecisBrievenbus 23:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

But it fulfills all criteria. What soapboxing did you notice (and what that you couldn't change/alter/remove?). --PaxEquilibrium 07:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Soapboxing or not, there is no way something that long is suitable for ITN (one of the criteria is a short headline). Obviously, I don't agree it meets all the criteria. Other then the length problem, there is only one paragraph in the bolded article about the event in question with only one reference and ironically the extremely long ITN proposal appears to go into more detail then the article itself. Also, based on the information currently presented it's not clear this is a story of international interest IMHO. Was this really a major incident or some idiots who tried to do something stupid but were stopped by the police? Oh and BTW, I just noticed it doesn't seem to be in portal current events either. So all in all, I don't really see how you can claim it fulfills the criteria when frankly it doesn't seem to fulfill any of them. Nil Einne 08:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The soapboxing I talked about was in your nom. The only way to change/alter/remove it would be for me to edit your comment, which is something I won't do. Words like uncanonical, seize by force and the mob and sidenotes that the church "has no control over most religious institutions in Montenegro" border on pov. Cows fly kites(Aecis)Rule/Contributions 12:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

"Uncanonical" means that it's uncanonical (just like we would note "unrecognized" or "self-proclaimed" when we'd write about Abkhazia and South Ossetia). The other soapboxing I took direct from sources, as even the media had reported a much greater extent - writing "Montenegrin nationalists" and "Montenegrin extremists". The crowd yelled "Risto [Archbishop of Montenegro and the Littoral], Satan!" and "Chetniks [ethnic slur], traitors!". The sole goal of the operation was to seize control and steal an object owned by another party and expel all of its residents and owners. The crowd's leader also threatened to let them in, or he'll start bloodshed. The last sentence is there to emphasize the story (the whole issue lies in the fact that the Serbian Orthodox Church has control over most or practically all religious institutions in Montenegro, while the Montenegrin Orthodox Church is practically non-existent), didn't see POV there. You could've also written to below a better version. ;) --PaxEquilibrium 20:53, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The US Supreme Court rules in favor of the government in Gonzales v. Carhart, upholding the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. This is of enormous import when considering the history of abortion jurisprudence, as it signals a reversal in the Court's stance toward the issue.--Swattie 21:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Posted. I found more relevant updates at Gonzales v. Carhart, so I put in the bolded link there. --PFHLai 23:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

this is more deaths than in Virginia, and is also a main headline on BBC, CNN etc.. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 15:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Business as usual over there ? Please explain significance. (Is this the most/worst ____ since _____ ?) --PFHLai 17:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

it isn't the worst. But that's no reason for not including it. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 18:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Instead of excluding this, I'm looking for good reasons to include it. What is noteworthy here ? Bombings are common in Iraq these day (unfortunately). --PFHLai 18:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Strong support. It is "the deadliest day in [Baghdad] since the start of the U.S.-Iraqi campaign to pacify the capital two months ago." [11] That's quite significant, it shows no improvement in Iraq despite the start of the Operation Law and Order. The U.S. military commander in Iraq, David Petraeus, has gone so far as to say Iraq will be 'doomed' if this current plan fails. (see article on Operation Law and Order) --Edcolins 19:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Upon reading through relevant articles on the UEFA website, I understand that the hosts of Euro 2012 are the national football associations of Poland and Ukraine. See [12]: "Polish Football Association president Michał Listkiewicz spoke ... Listkiewicz was joined on stage at the City Hall in the Welsh capital by his Football Federation of Ukraine counterpart Grigoriy Surkis ..." And [13]: "The process is a tribute to each one of the five national associations involved and to the political authorities and the football fans who have all given such tremendous backing to their respective bids." And [14]: "Ten associations, involving eight bids, informed UEFA by the end of January 2005 that they would be interesting (sic!) in holding the event." With that in mind, I suggest: "The Union of European Football Associations chooses the Polish Football Association and the Football Federation of Ukraine to host the 2012 UEFA European Football Championship." Cows fly kites(Aecis)Rule/Contributions 12:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Oppose, lets mention this if a winner is crowned already (like in 2012, or in 2008 for the next tourney). I don't see this on any news outlet, especially with the continuing coverage of the VT massacre. --HowardtheDuck 12:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Do you consider news websites to be news outlets as well? In that case, this has been mentioned on CNN.com, and is currently the lead item on BBC News/Europe. Atm I don't have a tv at my disposal, so I can't check for tv coverage of this. Yes, this choice is dwarfed in significance by the VT massacre, but surely that can't be a reason not to update ITN. Cows fly kites(Aecis)Rule/Contributions 13:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes news websites count, but certainly the selection of host countries of Euro 2008 can't be that notable. You might as well add a certain "Binladen" running for provincial board member, the American Idol frenzy, etc. Don't worry, the UEFA Champions League final is coming so there'll be a soccer-related ITN item soon. --HowardtheDuck 14:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

You didn't just compare the European Football Championship to some pointless tv show, right? --Ouro(blah blah) 15:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, they do show that Sanjaya-fest on our side of the ocean, while Euro 2004 never arrived on free TV, lol. --HowardtheDuck 15:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't care much for tv anyway, so I cannot judge by what is shown and what isn't. I prefer a kind of absolute-magnitude approach. --Ouro(blah blah) 15:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it did arrive on free TV, but on the wee hours of the morning, taped. If we'll include this, we might as well add the Chicago bid suggested below, and each and every Olympic announcement bid. --HowardtheDuck 15:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

But it's not a bid, the decision was reached today and the host countries have been chosen. --Ouro(blah blah) 15:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

But how is that ITN-worthy? --HowardtheDuck 15:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It's a decision on the venue of the third biggest sports event on Earth. As pointed out towards the beginning of this discussion. It's as ITN-worthy as anything. It's also on the Polish (well, obvious) and German counterparts of en.wiki's ITN. --Ouro(blah blah) 15:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It's also the main news item on the ITN's of the Portuguese Wikipedia, of the Bosnian Wikipedia and of the Romanian Wikipedia. Cows fly kites(Aecis)Rule/Contributions 15:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Allow me to make a comparison. Suppose the IOC would announce the host city for the 2016 Summer Olympics (Tokyo? Chicago? Prague?). That would definitely be notable, right? This tournament is the second largest single sport tournament in the world in terms of the number of viewers, the money involved, the number of countries involved etc. Cows fly kites(Aecis)Rule/Contributions 15:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

But that would bring me to that Sanjaya-fest which gets to be seen live on free TV, at least on my country (with the number of English speakers more than Poland and Ukraine combined, FYI), while the #1 largest single sport tournament never got to be aired on free TV. (Wait, what's the #2 largest single sport tournament? Cricket World Cup?)

The point is, the Olympics and perhaps even the FIFA World Cup winning bids can be mentioned, but we'd have to draw the line, what's next, the fourth largest single sport tournament? How about the fifth? The 84th? And so on. And this tournament isn't even worldwide, it is intercontinental (although I understand ITN should be international, not necessarily worldwide), it's not the top level competition of the sport (that belongs to the World Cup and the Club World Cup). --HowardtheDuck 15:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[unindent] You do have a kind of a point, but you yourself agree that ITN's supposed to be international (what's the difference between international and worldwide in this context?). The Euro is big, continent-wide and involves a lot. --Ouro(blah blah) 16:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

International: between two or more nations; worldwide, well, almost everyone cares about it. Intercontinental is restricted to one continent, although I'll concede the Euro Championships are well followed in Asia, which will also make the Americas Championships 2007 that notable since the US basketball team competes there. --HowardtheDuck 16:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

There is an intrinsic flaw with such guidelines/limits regarding the top level competition of the sport. The Club World Cup stands above the UEFA Champions League in the football hierarchy, and as such is the the top level competition of club football. But the level of football in the Champions League is infinitely higher than the level at the Club World Cup. Euro 2012 is not the top level of competition, I agree, but it is definitely more notable than the Club World Cup. I guess it all depends on the definition of "top level": do you look at it from an institutional point of view or from a qualitative point of view? Cows fly kites(Aecis)Rule/Contributions 16:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

You are correct, theoretically, the Club World Cup should be higher than UEFA CL or its South American counterpart, same as the third-place match at the FIFA World Cup (which never made it to the ITN), over the two semi-final matches (which both made it), either way, Euro 2008 isn't the top level competition in football but it generates enough interest for it to the championship game be included at the ITN. But the announcement of Euro 2012's winning bid doesn't quite cut it, same as the Club World Cup or the Intercontinental Cup, for that matter. --HowardtheDuck 16:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I rest my case, should get busy in meatspace. But you'd have made a helluva lotta people happy including this blurb in the ITN. Cheers, Ouro(blah blah) 17:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This is wikinews material. Most of the new materials should not even be in an encyclopedia article entitled "2012 UEFA European Football Championship". The article about this championship is not an indiscriminate collection of information about things recently happened and somewhat related to it. What are the unrealisable plans for Italy or Croatia/Hungary doing there ? (Wikipedia is not a broken crystal ball.) Much of the text on the voting procedure should be reduced and IMO more useful if moved into the UEFA European Football Championship article to explain how things are done in this organization. They appear out of place to me. Things may need to be better organized. (See Bids for Olympic Games and related articles.)

Criteria #1 is already met, and the article has been updated. — Alex(T|C|E) 01:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

April 17

The following deceased "was in a high ranking office of power at the time of death" and he "died unexpectedly or tragically." I'm not sure this death is notable enough though, and I don't know if the updates to the article are sufficient. "Itchō Itō, mayor of Nagasaki, is assassinated during his re-election campaign. Police have arrested a senior ranking member of the yakuza organization Yamaguchi-gumi on suspicion of the murder." AecisBrievenbus 21:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I would say that he is a likely candidate, but the article appears a bit lean under the new guideline of "reasonable amount of information". - BanyanTree 05:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

An assassination during an election campaign qualifies as "unexpected" and "newsworthy". However, I don't think the mayor of a town with a population under half a million would be someone in "a high ranking office of power". Furthermore, this will be dwarfed by the VTech shooting or the protests in Ankara if it's posted right now, and people will scream on Talk:MainPage. We'll wait and see how the article grows as the story unfolds. --PFHLai 06:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

April 15

This should be put on the Main Page ASAP. This is more notable than any third world country news. Russia has more nukes than USA. Now Putin is trying to revert all changes, and make the country back to how Soviet Union was. Do we want another cold war? --Parker007 21:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but this needs to be seriously updated to include content from the past two days. Currently, almost all of the references are back in March. Zzyzx11(Talk) 22:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

You might be better off at Wikinews, this is an encyclopedia not a newspaper. We cover stuff that has happened, not breaking news. --Monotonehell 09:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The Dissenters March article has been expanded to include protests in Moscow on April 14, 2007, and Saint Petersburg on April 15, 2007. However, there isn't much on the police brutality mentioned in the suggested headline above. Do we need another headline ? And the scale of the protests seems small, compared to the protests in Ankara, Turkey over the same weekend, and that's getting to the bottom end of ITN. I'm not sure if this will ever get on ITN. This is getting old. --PFHLai 00:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Correction: Events in Moscow on the 14th are still missing from the wikipage. --PFHLai 07:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Unconfirmed: A little known Palestinian organisation calling itself the Al Tawhid Al Jihad brigade claims to have executed BBC reporter Alan Johnston. (The group stated that a video of the execution would be released shortly into media outlets). --Camptown 19:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Not if it is unconfirmed. Remember that this is an encyclopedia, not a 24/7 all-news channel or web site that spoon feeds various unconfirmed reports left and right. Zzyzx11(Talk) 23:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

April 14

"The DPRK misses an internationally-recognized deadline to shut down its Yongbyon nuclear reactor." or something along that lines. Its the most important international event to happen in the last few days. The great kawa 22:41, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Please draft a wikified headline, with the link to the most relevant and updated article bolded. Thanks. --PFHLai 02:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Ehh, screw it, the articles in question need substantial updates (other than a single line about the deadline passing) and there are at least three articles repeating essentially the same thing. I will need time to find appropriate sources to fix the articles and this is seemingly old news since the deadline was Saturday past. The Yongbyon article seems a logical choice and is the most informative for the update at hand, but it is merely a stub and I would hate to link to a "stubby" article from the Main Page. Nomination withdrawn.The great kawa 21:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone remember putting "The Japan Olympic Committee announces it has accepted the Tokyo 2016 Olympic bid as the Japan nominee to host the 2016 Summer Olympics" on ITN back on 22 August 2006? Zzyzx11(Talk) 22:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not Wikinews, In The News isn't a news ticker. ITN does not list candidates for elections or hosting bids. When the finalist is announced, that will be listed (provided the appropriate article is substantially updated and is in good condition). --Monotonehell 15:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's notable enough to be included in ITN. Famous people get arrested all the time for a myriad of reason. Maybe if he was executed by the Russian government for political dissidence, then maybe (then again, even deaths of very famous people do not get included here). The great kawa 00:17, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

It is notable if they are opposition leaders, which Garry Kasparov is. I support putting it on the front page. Thue | talk 08:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I support this going up, I think it qualifies, a democracy arresting a noted and vocal political dissident, especially a country as large as Russia. Plus ITN has been updated very little this April, i mean the two week old story about the TGV speed record still wont be the next to go.... Thethinredline 10:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps we should also mention in the line (provided it goes up) something about the fact that Kasparov has been one of the leader of the political opposition in the last few years, while the proposed line makes it seem as if Kasparov the celebrity was just checking out the demonstration and was arrested, while he was one of the people leading it. Thethinredline 11:04, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

This is probably too minor, with too little international interests. --PFHLai 02:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

April 11

Death of Kurt Vonnegut. I understand Rule 5 concerns, but Vonnegut was a "voice of a generation" writer, very widely read in the Vietnam years. Lead article on NY Times & Chgo Tribune sites. The article itself is badly in need of cleanup. Billbrock 05:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[`] I Support putting this into In the news section, definitely. SalvNaut 10:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

As much as I might disagree with some of his views, he is an iconic novelists that helped to define a generation. I have read a few of his books and he is definitely a very notable figure. I SUPPORT his inclusion on the Main Page. I suggest something like the following: "Critically-acclaimed American novelist, Kurt Vonnegut, dies at the age of 84 from brain injuries sustained in an earlier fall." The great kawa 11:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd say Vonnegut was a more than notable expert in his field. I support this one. --Monotonehell 11:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Would the article still need to be substianially updated tho? I've never actually quite understood the criteria when it comes to deaths. If it's an unexpected death which turns out to be a murder, e.g. Woolmer, then there is usually a fair amount of updating of the article needed. However for more normal 'old-age' style deaths, there is usually little to write about. The article is updated to briefly mention his death and perhaps to convert any present tense to past tense. But what exactly is a substanial update? In the Woolmer case for example, it took quite a while for it to be here because of 'updated article' concerns. In this case, while I'm not saying it shouldn't be in ITN, I'm not quite sure how we can expect much of an update since basically he just died. Perhaps there will be some mention of obituaries and the funeral but other then that what? I guess for things like Ronald Reagan or for that matter prominent former leaders of other countries, you tend to have state funerals and the like so there's something there but what about for more 'normal' people? Nil Einne 13:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

One has the cultural equivalent of a state funeral--discussion of the writer and his times. It's less significant than (say) the death of John Paul II, but far more significant than (say) the death of Bowie Kuhn. Would compare to the death of Milton Friedman, which was equally notable for similar reasons. Billbrock 16:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Strong Support. I can think of not much else which warrants a place on Wikipedia's mainpage than the passing of such an author. Kntrabssi 14:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

And reverted by me. I really wish that people would support/oppose items based on the actual criteria. Vonnegut's life was extraordinary, but his death was not. If he'd been murdered or killed by a stingray, we'd have plenty to write about. But he wasn't, so we don't (which is why the article contains a single sentence explaining his death).

Billbrock accurately compared this with Milton Friedman's death, and we omitted a mention of that from the main page too. —David Levy 17:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

But his death is In the news. I know he doesn;t fit the criteria, but who says the criteria are un-alterable? I've always thought that Wikipedia was tarnished by not mentioning deaths of extremely important figures just because they were expected to die. Regardless of our internal bureaucracy, people know he's dead, and not to see it on the world's preeminent information site is unusual, and as I've seen on the Main Page's talk page, some users (myself included) find it a bit disturbing. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 17:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

This is not an unusual or unprecedented situation. Whenever an iconic figure dies under ordinary circumstances, people unfamiliar with ITN's purpose (as well as some who are overcome with emotion) are shocked and appalled to see that his/her death isn't mentioned. I disagree that we should appease such individuals by bowing to systemic bias (the fact that Vonnegut was very famous and popular among Americans and other English speakers) and including an item pertaining to an ineligible occurrence warranting a one-sentence article update.

But he is the expert in his field! And this is news! So many will remind his books and think about his writing, life and death when they read it on the main page. I won't say the obvious that he deserves it - it's we, Wikipedians who deserve it. SalvNaut

Vonnegut's death is news, but this site is not Wikinews. A headline appears on the Wikinews main page, and that's where it belongs. —David Levy 20:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Still, this template is called "In the news". All who endorsed their support here, suggest that this kind of news should be reported on the main page. I might be not objective, one of my favorite writers has died. However, this dispute is not about significance of Vonnegut, am I correct? SalvNaut 23:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

This dispute is indeed not about the significance of Vonnegut, that has been established. This dispute, if you can call it that, is about whether Vonnegut's death meets our criteria for deaths. One condition is that the death be unexpected and/or tragic, so as to have an impact on current events. A change to the criteria for deaths has been discussed, but it's has not been processed yet afaict. AecisBrievenbus 00:04, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Now that I'm rereading the deaths criteria, I notice that it says that the deceased should meet "one of the following criteria..." (italics for emphasis). The deceased doesn't have to meet all of the criteria; dying "unexpectedly or tragically" and having an impact on current events are not always necessary. AecisBrievenbus 00:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

This comes up every time a world famous person dies, and I'll say what I said when James Brown died and we argued for days (it didn't get listed), and way back when Rosa Parks died (which did get on the main page, though after much argueing): When famous people die, people want to read about them and learn about their lives. I think we should be more considerate of this when we list items on ITN. A main page with links to articles very few people care about is a poorer page than one which points to articles many readers find interesting and will click on to learn more. I'm not advocating going all tabloid, but when a topic on which we have a good background article is all over the news, we should know our place and not be afraid to tell our readers about it on the main page. But in this case I'm actually against reluctant to linking the Vonnegut death. Not because I don't think he's famous enough, but because the article we have on him looks rather bad. I count 5 4 ugly obtrusive tags in it, and I'd feel embarrased to point our readers to it as it looks now. But that's just me, I guess. Shanes 01:28, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I would say that his death is unexpected. He fell, but who would think that something usually not so life-threatening would kill him? His death shocked the world, it wasn't as if he had cancer and was given a date of expected death or as if he died in his sleep. Also, the In the News section has been quite static over the last several days (weeks?) and this type of event will not only add real news but variety as well. STRONG SUPPORT!The great kawa 10:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Whatever anyone here says (bureaucracy...), I still can't believe Vonnegut is not on the main page... so it goes. I just hope his article will get on the main page soon as a featured article (needs a lot of work, though). SalvNaut 15:19, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

On the subject of water detected, true. However the recent news on that body amounts to 3 paragraphs. Also temporary lower standards due to current news free zone. --Monotonehell 11:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it's sufficiently old now not to be a 'newsflash', but it may need fleshing out a little first. Iorek85 12:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

That's not what's meant by the "newsflash" term above, this is appropriate. The request above is not to add an item with no wikilink to a substantial article on wikipedia. I'm unsure that the article will be expanded upon much more. I guess time will tell. I'd say that, even though this is dangerously close to a news article, it is noteworthy enough alone to go up soon. --Monotonehell 12:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I've just re-posted this. I'm happy with the additions to this new article in the last 10 hours or so. Moreover, we need sth to fill up the space on the right side of MainPage soon, as the incoming TFA is quite long. --PFHLai 23:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

April 1

First, there's no need to add a virtually-identical submission a day after having submitted it below. Second, while I think we're hurting for a freshened template, I really don't think this is super notable. The update to the article seems to me to be pretty much a restating that "the violence is now bad again." In comparison, there's substantial and continually-updated detail on the Iran crisis article, which I think should remain on the feed. This isn't to say that the Iranian situation is more important than the Somalia situation, only that Wikipedia's coverage of it is more detailed and, for better or for worse, reader interest is likely higher. The Tom 19:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

1. There was no reaction yesterday (if this doesn't appear and tomorrow blood is still being spilled I will re-add it!). 2. It is very notable, read BBC, Aljazeera etc.. 3. The news box has currently only 3 news items, so why not adding this??? Cheers, --TheFEARgod (Ч) 20:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

re:1. There doesn't have to be reaction. I certainly don't feel compelled to comment on every suggestion. Suggestions get posted if an admin senses they ought to be, and commented-on if a Wikipedian feels they have something to say about it.

re:if this doesn't appear and tomorrow blood is still being spilled I will re-add it!. I'm sorry, but that strikes me as purely disruptive behaviour. And the quantity of blood being spilled or lengthiness of its spilling is ultimately not a deciding factor in what gets posted. Should the article explain how the quantity of blood being spilt establishes this ongoing event as being notable in the context of the broader sweep of history, then certainly.

re:2. Again, the tired refrain - the submission's notability needs to be reflected in the article, not by a Google News search. Judging by the article, the inciting rationale for this submission is the following sentence: Meanwhile, the International Committee of the Red Cross said the fighting is Mogadishu's worst for more than 15 years. That's it. When the line on ITN is exactly the same length as the update in the article, its usually a good sign its not meeting the submission requirements.

re:3. The news box has only 3 news items because of Main Page aesthetic issues. That has always been the only inciting reason for removing items.

re:Also, the news from Mauritania is pretty old It is hardly uncommon for the last item on ITN to be five days old, although I agree it would be nice if turnover was a bit faster. I know I and several other regulars on ITN feel that the staleness or notability of the bottom items can be reason for lowering the requirements bar on adding new ones to the top. Even with that in mind, I didn't choose to add the Somalia item. If another admin strongly feels to the contrary, they may add it and I certainly won't make a stink. I'm just repeating what my interpretation of the guidelines is, which is by no means authoritative.

Feargod, I appreciate the fact you're advocating for these Somali articles. I personally think the conflict there has been given unduly minor billing in most news sources, and I'd love to help improve our readership's understanding of the situation there. But ITN is not a news-ticker, and death-of-the-day has no place without broader encyclopedicity. The Tom 20:45, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

if this doesn't appear and tomorrow blood is still being spilled I will re-add it Please don't. Nominating this item once is enough, an item doesn't disappear from our radar the next day. Nominating an item every day until it is put up reeks of WP:POINT. AecisBrievenbus 09:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Since this item has brought up an interesting and important point, I've moved discussion to the talk page. I expect this will lead us to a resolution on this kind of issue, and therefore to a new "consensus guideline" for the future --Monotonehell 13:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)